Sunday, March 29, 2015

Don't Cry for Obama

Jay Solomon and Gerald Seib seem almost to feel sorry for poor Barack Obama. In so doing they are adopting the party line: the situation in the Middle East is so complicated that no one could manage it.

They explain:

The Middle East has descended into a state of disarray unusual even for that troubled region, imperiling President Barack Obama’s policy dreams and leaving him with limited ability to control events.

The latest complication has erupted in Yemen, where rebel forces backed by Iran have driven out the country’s president and are expanding their control southward across the country. The prospect that those Shiite rebels might succeed in taking over a neighboring country has so alarmed the Sunni leaders of Saudi Arabia that they have launched airstrikes and assembled an international coalition to intervene—a coalition that the U.S. has vowed to help.

That means the Obama administration finds itself in a highly awkward position: It now is lined up against Iran in Yemen. Meanwhile, it is trying to negotiate a nuclear deal with Tehran and is working on the same side as the Iranians to defeat Islamic State fighters in Iraq.
Moreover, at this moment of high regional anxiety, Mr. Obama finds his ties to Israel and Egypt, two traditional bulwarks of pro-American sentiment, under great strain. And his dream of smoothly exiting the long wars in Iraq and Afghanistan suffered a double blow this week as U.S. planes had to spring back into action in Iraq in an attempt to push back Islamic State forces, and Mr. Obama agreed to keep in Afghanistan thousands of troops he had hoped could leave by year’s end.

The upshot is that Mr. Obama is engaged in a juggling act, trying to keep aloft a nuclear deal with Iran, the fight against Islamic State and an effort to prevent Yemen from sliding into hostile hands—all without the kind of military presence or solid phalanx of loyal allies the U.S. once had at its disposal.

The esteemed journalists fail to notice that President Obama is the one person who is most responsible for the mess.

After all, his policies produced it. His surrender in Iraq produced part of it. His mismanagement of the Arab Spring helped advance it. His petulant attacks on Israel moved it along. His betrayal of an ally showed that he could not be trusted: His willful drive to make a deal, any deal with Iran contributed mightily to the problem.

Now, the situation is out of control. Our allies no longer trust us and our enemies no longer fear us.

It’s what happens when America elects as president a man who has no experience in foreign policy and who acts as though the real world must fulfill his dreams, or the dreams of his father.


Dennis said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Dennis said...

The one I am crying for is this country.

We are seeing our on version of Neville Chamberlin.

NOTE; We are now seeing the beginnings of a larger war and the start of a nuclear arms race in the ME.

I cry for us because we will not be able to stop this from being an existential threat to us.

Ignatius Acton Chesterton OCD said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Ignatius Acton Chesterton OCD said...

Dennis, you really are insulting Neville Chamberlain.

And you are correct about the Middle East stakes. The people who ceaselessly ridiculed Bush for "lying" about WMD now shrug their shoulders as the Obama Administration cow tows to a terrorist theocracy actively pursuing nuclear capability (all the while chiding the "world community" to try to stop them). After saying Iran will not have a nuclear weapon, the Obamatrons have no strategic card left to play. Max Boot says this means the President is in de facto pursuit of a regional "friendship" with the mullahs, hanging Israel out to dry (because Obama doesn't like Israel's definitive choice for a prime minister, while negotiating with an unelected ayatollah).

Oh yeah, and with the seriousness of Iranian intentions, where are all the nuclear disarmament people now? Shouldn't Obama be hearing from them? You know, the people in the hippie outfits singing songs, smoking weed and offering the promise of a parallel (and yet still unknown) universe where their ideas work. Where are the histrionics, the campouts, the pop musicians, Hollywood types, the people climbing the White House fence, shouting obscenities at municipal "pigs"? I guess we'll have to wait for another Republican administration to see that. Shows the selective "authenticity" of Leftist social activism.

I wonder what Obama would do if Israel's enemies saw his actions as a "green light" to settle the Jewish question and wipe Israel off the map (.as the Iranians have thmselves declared). What if hostilities started today and in two weeks Israel was on the ropes? What would Obama do? Is suspect he would stay out of it, which is a choice for Israel's destruction.

Dennis Prager asked an interesting question last week: "When Israel wins a war against its Middle East neighbors, what do you think will happened to the vanquished? When a country like Iran, or its proxies, win a war against Israel, what will happen to the Jews?"

I suspect it would be an unspeakable humanitarian tragedy, and Obama would speak a lot about it. And do nothing. Like just about everything else he does in the foreign policy realm. But when he does do something, he has the anti-Midas Touch. Everything goes to $&%#.

Jim Sweeney said...

Obama's conduct does not arise from his lack of experience in foreign affairs. It is a direct result of his intentions to accomplish the objectives he has established. Not only does he want to transform America, he has extended his scope to the world.

As to this country, he is a traitor. As to the world, he is a secret Muslim terrorist by means other than war to reach his transformative goals..

n.n said...

Obama's goal is to change the post-WWII order.

Dennis said...


I realize that I am being unfair to Chamberlin. What we are seeing is Cloward and Piven writ large on a global level. The continued manufacture of crisis in order to transform the world. It is the fact that it is transformative that appeals to the activist in Obama. It does not seem to matter how many people get killed or who is being manipulated into creating that war.
Note the almost total lack of compassion for those who die, whether it be the Iranians in the "Green Revolution, the Christians in the ME, the Libyans, the Jews, the number of people who died for Bergdahl, or almost any group of people who fall prey to this death cult.
One should not be surprised by his closeness to Bill Ayres who stated that 25 million people lost would not be a problem as long as he got the utopia he and Bernadette desired (SIC). One only has to look at his ability to compartmentalize and instantly go play golf. This is not a man who truly feels for anyone other than himself. Has he really helped blacks or any other minority.
It fits with the almost messianic belief Obama has in his ability to transform the world as he sees fit. Nothing else matters but Obama's world vision. Laws and rules are for other people.
Again, I cry for this country despite the fact it cared so little for its own existence that it would not take the time to know the person they were electing not once, but twice.
The pain I see in many democrats now trying to justify Obama and the outright hostility of Bill Richardson is instructive.

Sam L. said...

One could easily conclude that what is happening is what Obama wants.

Ignatius Acton Chesterton OCD said...

Dennis @March 30, 2015 at 5:41 AM:

Indeed. To the Obamatrons, it's collateral damage... nothing more.